Dunn, Jeffrey H. wrote:
[...]
As a result of these observations, I am turning the question around:
Why would anyone want to use a 64 bit interface identifier?
I speculate that one possible reason for this was to design a SLAAC over
Ethernet that is reliable, simple, universal and
Alex,
While I agree that the use of an EUI-64 network identifier predicates a
64-bit prefix, I am not convinced that an EUI-64 is the best way to go.
After all, the Ethernet MAC address is only 48 bits, so we are
essentially throwing away 16 bits (assuming that the identifier is
globally unique).
I speculate that one possible reason for this was to design a SLAAC over
Ethernet that is reliable, simple, universal and straightforward to
implement.
BINGO. And those are all (IMHO) Good Things.
In a way, I see SLAAC to have become so popular as opposed to DHCP.
Were DHCPv6 more developed
